It's well established law that the moment one party to a family court proceeding files a petition dealing with a given subject matter in one court, the other party cannot subsequently commence another proceeding dealing with that same subject matter in another court. In particular, if one party to a marriage (let's say, the husband) files for divorce in the family court where he lives (let's say, in Los Angeles, California), then the other party (let's say, the wife) cannot, after that point, while the first case is still before the court, also file for divorce (or annulment) in the court where she lives (let's say, Phoenix, Arizona). The second proceeding is invalid; that court lacks jurisdiction to even hear the matter. I believe this is what's referred to as the "first-filed rule", or the "exclusive concurrent jurisdiction doctrine".
Fox Files for Divorce In California in 2012
So, on 2012-11-28, Fox filed a Petition for Dissolution of Marriage in the Los Angeles Superior Court (LASC) Petition for Dissolution of Marriage. If you look at that document, you will notice it bears the LASC stamp, proving it WAS actually filed on 2012-11-28 by Fox. And the last page of the document is the "Proof of Service By Mail", filed with the LASC on 2012-12-17. So everything was done and filed correctly.
Did I respond to Fox's Petition for Dissolution? No, I did not. Why? I don't know, maybe I didn't really want to be divorced from him after all. Who knows why I do, or don't do, what I do?
There is, sometimes, some dispute about whether a court gains exclusive concurrent jurisdiction as of the date the petition is filed, or the date the petition is served on the other party. But either way, as of either 2012-11-28 or 2012-12-17, divorce proceedings between Fox and I were formally before the California court and the LASC had exclusive jurisdiction of the subject matter (i.e. the termination of our marriage).
I File for Annulment in Arizona in 2014
For years, I had been repeatedly telling Fox I was going to file, in Arizona, for an annulment of our marriage email dated 2012-09-12 2:08 PM. And Fox repeatedly reminded me we already have a divorce proceeding before the California court emails dated 2012-09-12 2:38 PM; 2012-09-12 8:57 PM; 2015-03-15 6:45 PM; 2015-05-08 12:18 PM.
But, in my typical fashion, I ignored the rules and laws and did what I wanted to do, in the way I wanted to do it. So, on 2014-08-29 I went to the courthouse in Phoenix, where I was living, and filed for an annulment. I did this knowing we already had a divorce proceeding in the California court. I did not tell the Arizona court about that because then the Arizona court would have told me it doesn't have jurisdiction and that I have to proceed with the California case.
When you commence a petition in the family court, you have to declare that you do not already have a petition dealing with the same subject matter in another court. Clearly, I must have lied to the Arizona court.
Fox did not bother responding to the petition for annulment or appearing for any of the hearings.
On 2015-08-04, the Arizona court granted the annulment, based on my false claim that Fox was already married to someone else at the time he and I got married Default Decree of Annulment of Marriage.
That's all fine and swell, right? Except that the Arizona court didn't have jurisdiction to hear the matter or to make a ruling in it because the California court already had exclusive jurisdiction over the subject matter of mine and Fox's marriage. And I knew this all along. And I very deliberately withhled that information from the Arizona court.
Why on earth would I do something like that? Why wouldn't I just proceed with the divorce proceeding we already had in California? Perhaps because when you really get down to it, I really want to be married to Patrick Fox. Or perhaps because I'm such a control freak that I want to be the one that ended the marriage, not Fox. Really, could there possibly be any other explanation?
And here's the kicker: This isn't the first time I did this. In August 2011, I filed for divorce from Fox in Arizona. And in November 2011 that was dismissed because we already had a divorce proceeding before the California court. What the fuck is wrong with me, huh? Why do I always insist on NOT following the well-established rules and procedurs?
So there you have it, like it or not, I am very likely still legally married to Fox - because I refuse to follow very simple rules and procedures.
Comments